Well, maybe Chelsea Clinton will be the first woman president...
(unfortunately, for really horrible reasons, Hillary probably won't be).
Posted by A at April 22, 2008 07:12 AMChelsea has spent as much time getting Experience in the White House as Hillary has....so, yeah, why not Chelsea for President. After all, she was ducking the sniper fire just the same as Hillary was.
Posted by T2 at April 22, 2008 07:31 AM"for really horrible reasons".....you mean, like not getting enough votes?
Posted by T2 at April 22, 2008 07:33 AMShe was terrific. Well-spoken and smart. Like her Mom, she has a lot of courage. I respect them both.
T2 - go look in your couch corners for a personality.
Posted by new and improved at April 22, 2008 07:43 AMafter tonite..together with michigan and florida hillary will lead the popular vote..if ya count them..it is a real argument..as may be barry's inability ..despite 9mil in tv ads directly aimed at pennsylvanians..that he can't finish the job..what is blatently apparent at this point in time that if he were really the frontrunner..and the man of hope and change..he would win pa in a landslide..is that a tough concept??..there is something very wrong with his candidacy...he should be talking of a victory..not rationalizing a loss that is really a win
Posted by dennis at April 22, 2008 08:00 AMDamn!!!
I had JUST decided that I would never read another one of your posts as long as I lived, but the Chelsea title piqued my curiosity and I was happy to actually get to see her talk for the first time!! Good post.
I still think you're pretty whacked though.
Posted by GreenVTster at April 22, 2008 08:33 AMI think I've finally gotten to the bottom of this goofy "surrogate" business, as in: "I have to say that from everything I've seen and heard, she's one heck of an impressive woman - and, not to mention, a great surrogate for Sen. Clinton."
"Surrogate" is a code word meaning someone you approve of when that person is (or when you imagine that person is) supporting the same candidate as you are.
"Surrogate" is, however, a term of scorn and abuse when the supposed "surrogate" supports a different candidate than you do, or when you imagine that persons supports said candidate.
Posted by joel dan walls at April 22, 2008 09:27 AMI hear that Obama's children are well-mannered. Maybe they'll make good candidates too.
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at April 22, 2008 10:46 AMI hear that Obama's children are well-mannered. Maybe they'll make good candidates too.
It worked for their father.
Posted by snark at April 22, 2008 11:04 AMIt worked for their father.
Posted by snark at April 22, 2008 11:04 AM
Uh....hold on there, Bucko...he ain't there yet.
Rough water ahead! Stay tuned !!
Posted by jj at April 22, 2008 11:47 AMWow. I must say the smugness and condescension present in the posts and articles on this site are just beyond reproach. You know I've been checking out this site pretty consistently to try to achieve a balance of points of view and now it's just too much to put up with.
Yes, this post is mostly directed and snark, dennis, A, and newandimproved.
Posted by billyboy at April 22, 2008 12:53 PMI must say the smugness and condescension present in the posts and articles on this site are just beyond reproach.
And our grasp of word meanings is also beyond reproach.
You know I've been checking out this site pretty consistently to try to achieve a balance of points of view and now it's just too much to put up with.
Yes, too much balance is certainly a bad thing.
Yes, this post is mostly directed and snark, dennis, A, and newandimproved.
So basically you were looking for more people blowing more uncritical sunshine up Barack Obama's posterior?
[Was that smug and cendescending enough? We do have a reputation to uphold.]
Posted by snark at April 22, 2008 01:12 PMC'mon snark, billyboy was complimenting you on your exemplary smugness and condescension, and ya go and give him a freebie? We oughta charge for such fine smugness, and double it for throwing in some balance. Snarkiness ain't easy, ya know.
Posted by iamcoyote at April 22, 2008 01:47 PMI think the jury must still be out on Chelsea. Her parents are immensely wealthy; she's a Stanford grad; and her parents have connections that could get her a job doing anything she wants. She chooses to work for a hedge fund. One would hope that is Chelsea only trying to get some real world, private sector experience, to see how us little people have to live. If so, good for her. If not, oh, well. Time will tell.
Posted by kaleidescope at April 22, 2008 01:51 PMFortunately for the Clintons,their daughter is bright and a skilled money manager.
That will be helpful in the management of the family foundation given Bill's rather obvious post-CABG vascular dementia [e.g. SC campaign, yesterday's WHYY radio interview, today's denial].
Posted by tfitznc at April 22, 2008 02:13 PMah yes snark, sarcasm really isn't your strong suit.
I think the difference between 'balance' and 'smugness' is evident in your first post.... oh wait, no, that was just sophomoric name calling. Perhaps smug and condescending was indeed too kind.
But seriously, how about Dennis making the point that Florida should really be counted, while in the same paragraph making the point that campaigning and advertising should have a result in vote results. Remember, Obama was down by as much as 25 in PA just a few short weeks ago, and now possibly will come within 10-15. That goes to show that campaigning indeed does have an effect and therefore perhaps, Florida should not count?
whatever. I can't wait to move this on the the GE.
Posted by billyboy at April 22, 2008 02:22 PMah yes snark, sarcasm really isn't your strong suit.
That's funny...I find it to be beyond reproach.
Posted by iamcoyote at April 22, 2008 02:27 PMhaha. It really is some quality stuff. Very top shelf. I don't see it done much better elsewhere.
I figured it was better to be sarcastic than just come out and call it all the negative stuff that you see spouted around the blogs these days.
Posted by billyboy at April 22, 2008 02:33 PMah yes snark, sarcasm really isn't your strong suit.
Yeah, if I wrote that I'd try and pawn it off as 'sarcasm' too.
I think the difference between 'balance' and 'smugness' is evident in your first post.... oh wait, no, that was just sophomoric name calling. Perhaps smug and condescending was indeed too kind.
Who did I call a name? I never call people names. But if I did my name calling would surely be beyond reproach.
But seriously...
Oh, now you want us to take you seriously?
...how about Dennis making the point that Florida should really be counted, while in the same paragraph making the point that campaigning and advertising should have a result in vote results.
Typically I just ignore Dennis. It helps with the whole 'balance' thingy.
Remember, Obama was down by as much as 25 in PA just a few short weeks ago, and now possibly will come within 10-15. That goes to show that campaigning indeed does have an effect and therefore perhaps, Florida should not count?
Well, that's a good point. Perhaps you could have come in here and made that point instead of calling people 'smug and condescending'? But all states are different. There've been plenty of states where the polls didn't shift a lot regardless of the amount of campaigning.
Posted by snark at April 22, 2008 02:43 PMporr billyboy - can't man up to admitting that Chelsea is terrific and needs to whine instead about...err...something. Yawn.
Posted by new and improved at April 22, 2008 02:47 PM
holy crap. My bad.
it was 'new and improved' that did the name calling. I just had to scroll back up to double check. couch cushions and personality... yes. my bad, that wasn't you snark.
But it was you who implied that Obama has been doing well because he's 'well mannered' I believe the quote was, "It worked for their father". You dont' find that to be diminishing the accomplishments in that candidates life? It may not be name calling, but it sure aint fair.
well, shoot. It looks like my attempt at sarcasm truly failed, for you are committed to seeing that I meant something different with my choice of words regardless of claims to the contrary. There's that sweet sweet smell of smugness in the air again. awesome. /sarcasm
Posted by billyboy at April 22, 2008 02:53 PMBut it was you who implied that Obama has been doing well because he's 'well mannered'
Do you think he is not well mannered?
I believe the quote was, "It worked for their father".
Correct.
You dont' find that to be diminishing the accomplishments in that candidates life?
I'm not all that impressed with his accomplishments. Could you name a few for me?
It may not be name calling, but it sure aint fair
It's not fair? It's not fair for me to think that Obama is where he is because of his persona? Please.
Posted by snark at April 22, 2008 03:30 PMsmug AND condescending. Check and Check.
accomplishments (of course you could look all these up, but you probably won't.)
nonproliferation legislation (google Lugar Obama nonproliferation)
ethics and lobbying reform perhaps?
perhaps you've heard or read his prescient speech regarding the war in Iraq? Hillary sure didn't.
Not taking money for PACs and Lobbyists? (a la Edwards)
How about the guts to take a stand and say that he's willing to take action against targets in Pakistan if Musharaf was unwilling to.
Maybe this?
There's a lot more that I personally like about him, but that's because I cared enough to find out. DId you pick a horse in this race yet? Hillary perhaps? (after all, this is LeftCoaster) Was there something specific in her past that strikes you as quite remarkable? Maybe her failed health insurance initiative? Maybe her support for NAFTA (after all, it was 12 years ago)? I know, it was her speech in China! (cause we know it aint that trip to Bosnia.)
whoa.... look at me... looks like I'm being smug and condescending now... must be contagious.
Posted by billyboy at April 22, 2008 03:54 PMsmug AND condescending. Check and Check
Yes, you've already established that point.
You didn't really mention anything I didn't already know about. As far as "the speech" goes I'd have been impressed if he'd followed it up once he actually managed to get elected.
I'd be more impressed if he simply opposed the death penalty all together.
As for Pakistan, politicians say lots of things. But if that impresses you good for you.
Is it ok if I'm not as impressed with him as you are?
sure. be unimpressed. But also perhaps recognize that the people who support him don't do so because he's simply, 'well mannered.' - the dismissive nature is, well... you know.
Just so you know, I've called people out for suggesting that people are only voting Hillary because they liked her husband's presidency. As much as it may be true, we can't see into the hearts of others to know why someone is supporting whomever they are supporting.
Posted by billyboy at April 22, 2008 04:30 PMoh yes, as for following up on on Iraq war stance once in Senate?
Opposing the declaration of war is wholly different than voting to pull financing from a war. Until the CoC is behind the mission of withdrawal of forces, any suspension of funds would be both reckless and also perceived as 'anti-troops'
As for Pakistan issue. Yes, I am impressed with what he 'said', especially because he's the only one who's 'said' such a thing. Hillary goes on record saying that Pakistan is an ally and that any such claim is reckless. So, she must think the CIA was reckless in the recent operation that both was in Pakistan and unsanctioned by Pakistan, and just so happened to be successful in killing an al qaeda commander.
Posted by billyboy at April 22, 2008 04:47 PMsure. be unimpressed. But also perhaps recognize that the people who support him don't do so because he's simply, 'well mannered.' - the dismissive nature is, well... you know.
I'm not the 'dismissive' one who came into the thread and started pissing on people by name.
That was, well....you.
I expressed my opinion. Can I do that?
Posted by snark at April 22, 2008 09:21 PMOh, terribly sorry I 'dissmissively' called you our for being dismissive and condescending. Was I wrong in that assessment? But no, you thought you had some kickass retort to my apparently misread attempt at sarcasm, and you decided to try to lay into me because I called you out by name?
Dude. Your 'name' is SNARK. You really think what you had to say was worth taking seriously?
The Hill supporters couldn't just be content with a loss, they really needed to rip the progressive movement in half out of a sense of what, entitlement or greed? Maybe I'll check this site out again after the general, but until then, this is just as bad and delusional as TalkLeft.
Posted by billyboy at April 22, 2008 10:59 PMBillyboy,
Who did you decide to whine about in your first comment? Anyone who you perceived as either a Clinton supporter or a non-Obama supporter, that's who. But go back and look at the comment you completely ignored. It was a comment by T2 which basically 'dismissively' equated Hillary Clinton's life accomplishments with those of her young daughter. So save me the holier than though billshit because you're just as much smug and condescending as you acuse others of being.
Posted by snark at April 23, 2008 04:24 AMseeing as Hillary is basically running on an "I've lived in the white house" campaign, I think T2 was just pointing out the obvious, that living there does not qualify her! I wholeheartedly agree with T2. What he didn't mention is that Chelsea does have a head start in the skill of lying, seeing as she was at first corroborating the story her mom was telling about Tuzla. Bravo Chelsea! We wouldn't want to let down the expectations of your bald face lying parents now would we?
What else does Hillary have, huh? 2 cushy elections to NY state senate? 8 years elected office held total? Some years of experience she's really touting. Do you really NOT see that it's all bullshit? Are you so stuck in some twisted world view that Hillary is entitled to the presidency because BIll promised it to her that you're willing to disregard the obvious?
Survey says......? YES!
sorry you think I'm acting 'holier than though[sic]'. Now, who was the little bitch who was trying to give me a dressing down about word meanings? Oh yes... it was the holier than THOU snark.
Posted by billyboy at April 23, 2008 10:41 AMAw, is the widdle billyboy cranky? What happened to the outrage at namecalling? At least the faux pearl-clutching is gone, so we can see your Unity Pony for what it is - a big lie.
Someone get billy a cookie and a nap, stat!
Posted by iamcoyote at April 23, 2008 11:15 AMSurvey says......? YES!
I'll start there because everything you wrote before that in your last comment exposes your hypocrisy and really isn't worth addressing.
sorry you think I'm acting 'holier than though[sic]'.
I used an incorrect spelling.
...it was the holier than THOU...
Obviously, you knew what I meant.
What you wrote, on the other hand, was just nonsense.
Now, who was the little bitch who was trying to give me a dressing down...
Name calling? From you? More hypocrisy. Imagine my surprise.
If you'd like to continue further exposing yourself as a hypocrite I'm more than glad to continue this exchange. But you should get some help with your anger issues. It's really distasteful.
coyote,
Isn't it amazing how so many of the rabid Obama supporters are afflicted with such intense anger? The guy comes in here complaining about the tone and lack of balance and winds up ranting about how Hillary Clinton has accomplished nothing relative to Obama (who got elected to the Senate running against a lunatic that anyone with a pulse could have beaten), slinging mud and name calling. All in support of his candidate who claims to want to unify the nation and change the tone of politics. It's stunning. Really gives you pause.
Posted by snark at April 23, 2008 11:30 AMYou have to admit that it's clever on Obama's part to take on the mantle of being above the fray, knowing that his surrogates and followers will do the dirty work for him. It's a method Bush used, and still uses to great effect. It gives him deniability, yet the message still gets out. Obama learned well, and you have to give him credit for that. If he is the nominee, he's going to need every advantage he can get.
Posted by iamcoyote at April 23, 2008 12:33 PM